CAF Civity for TfW: News and updates on introduction.

[Krokodil]

I’m sorry but that’s nonsense. There’s no Welsh speaker over the age of 6/7 in Wales that doesn’t speak English. Everyone gets taught it at primary school. I say this as the minority English-only speaker in my house.

Plenty of older people in rural areas struggle with English. I can get by in France but it's not the same as being fluent.

Had 197110 on the Chester - Lime Street shuttle yesterday. Very warm inside, seemed like air con had failed. Anybody else had this happen on other 197s?

The air con is fine. The issue will be the external sensors that measure the ambient tempurature. They're hopeless.

 

[Richard Scott]

Good, it should never be reversed. Politics or not, the erosion of Welsh language and culture threatens the very existence of what makes Wales different to anywhere else. The insecurities of a small minority of Telegraph-reading English folk are of minimal concern.

What nonsense, a language does not a culture make. Plenty of countries with a string national identity that don't have their own language and, yes, I do live in Wales.

 

[Broseley man]

What nonsense, a language does not a culture make. Plenty of countries with a string national identity that don't have their own language and, yes, I do live in Wales.

I think it is absolutely brilliant to get on a train in England or Wales and hear the Welsh language being used in the announcements. It's uplifting.

Get rid of some of the repetitive announcements and make sure the English can be easily heard as well. Of course. This can be done.

Well done TfW and the Welsh government for giving it a go.

 

[emoaconr]

What nonsense, a language does not a culture make. Plenty of countries with a string national identity that don't have their own language and, yes, I do live in Wales.

What dismissive and inflamatory piffle.

 

[Dai Corner]

I think it is absolutely brilliant to get on a train in England or Wales and hear the Welsh language being used in the announcements. It's uplifting.

Get rid of some of the repetitive announcements and make sure the English can be easily heard as well. Of course. This can be done.

Well done TfW and the Welsh government for giving it a go.

They're train announcements, not works of literature, popular culture or references to important historical events.

 

[33017]

Plenty of older people in rural areas struggle with English. I can get by in France but it's not the same as being fluent.

Not to the extent they don’t understand basic announcements in English. My wife rarely spoke English until she went to school in the early 70s, and she grew up in the Rhymney valley, but her parents and grandparents (from Ceredigion and Gwynedd) were very dismissive of the idea there were people in far flung parts of Wales who were monoglot Welsh speakers even in those days.

And in case there’s any doubt, I think all school kids in Wales should be taught Welsh to a good standard.

 

[Cowley]

The discussion about the Welsh language is going to take us off into territory that isn’t related to this thread so can we leave it there please.

If anyone wants to start a discussion along those lines in the general discussion section then that’s fine obviously and we can always move some of these posts over.

Thanks everyone.

 

[Jez]

Am I right in thinking a 4 carriage 197 (2 x 2 cars) has roughly the same amount of seats as a 3 car 175? So it won't be as much an increase in capacity as we used to get until the 5 cars (3 and 2.cars together) start working..Still it's got to be better than a 2 car 150 which a lot of the services are currently.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Am I right in thinking a 4 carriage 197 (2 x 2 cars) has roughly the same amount of seats as a 3 car 175? So it won't be as much an increase in capacity as we used to get until the 5 cars (3 and 2.cars together) start working..Still it's got to be better than a 2 car 150 which a lot of the services are currently.

Based on TfW's fleet guide, looks like with 232 seats, a double 2 car 197 beats the 190 of a 3 car 175 by 42 seats, a ~20% increase.

 

[Krokodil]

Based on TfW's fleet guide, looks like with 232 seats, a double 2 car 197 beats the 190 of a 3 car 175 by 42 seats, a ~20% increase.

If an entire extra vehicle only brings 42 seats then that's not much to write home about.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

If an entire extra vehicle only brings 42 seats then that's not much to write home about.

The amount of space wasted used on the catering area is probably partially to blame, looks like it takes up about 6 seats per unit.

 

[GWVillager]

If an entire extra vehicle only brings 42 seats then that's not much to write home about.

No, but it will be two extra vehicles in the long run. It's just that there will still be an increase in the short term, there's a significant difference between 190 and 232 seats.

 

[AMD]

If an entire extra vehicle only brings 42 seats then that's not much to write home about.

But will also bring extra standing room.

Regarding the air con, if it's like the 195 fleet, then it will have a variable setting depending upon the external temperature. It starts at 21deg for 15deg and below externally, rising as far as 28deg if its 40deg outside.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Regarding the air con, if it's like the 195 fleet, then it will have a variable setting depending upon the external temperature. It starts at 21deg for 15deg and below externally, rising as far as 28deg if its 40deg outside.

Why can't it just be a reasonable temperature all of the time rather than massively increasing to 28 at the hottest?

 

[Krokodil]

No, but it will be two extra vehicles in the long run. It's just that there will still be an increase in the short term, there's a significant difference between 190 and 232 seats.

Aside from the catering cupboard, it shows how inefficient the driving vehicles are though, a (hypothetical 4 car 197/2 unit would have 260 seats, for the same cost as the 232 in a 2+2 lash-up.

But will also bring extra standing room.

I'll leave it to you to tell the passengers. Admittedly there is much more room to stand than on a comparable 158/175 formation but most people would rather not be standing at all.

Regarding the air con, if it's like the 195 fleet, then it will have a variable setting depending upon the external temperature. It starts at 21deg for 15deg and below externally, rising as far as 28deg if its 40deg outside.

That's the theory. In practice the units are often at 24 degrees or so at the moment even though we're not exactly in a heatwave.

 

[Jez]

Based on TfW's fleet guide, looks like with 232 seats, a double 2 car 197 beats the 190 of a 3 car 175 by 42 seats, a ~20% increase.

Thanks for attaching the fleet guide. So a small increase if a 4 car turns up and a much bigger increase when it will be 5 cars.

Even the small increase in seats on a 4 car could be vital in everyone getting a seat on some of those busy services to/from Manchester.

 

[AMD]

Why can't it just be a reasonable temperature all of the time rather than massively increasing to 28 at the hottest?

To reduce the effect of thermal shock.

That's the theory. In practice the units are often at 24 degrees or so at the moment even though we're not exactly in a heatwave.

Well on a 195 thats the setting for around 25/26 deg outside, up to around 29deg.

 

[Krokodil]

Well on a 195 thats the setting for around 25/26 deg outside, up to around 29deg.

It's a bit short of 25/26°C outside at the moment (tomorrow maybe, but certainly not during the past week). The outside temperature might be reading 22°C and the inside 25°C.

There's also an acknowledged issue with the external sensors on some units. I had one earlier that thought the outside temperature was 31°C. It certainly was not. Occasionally a unit turns up that thinks that it's 5°C outside and tries to cook the passengers to compensate.

 

[MDB1images]

197108 was moved from Donnnigton RFT to Crewe this morning.

Do you know if it remained at Crewe C.S or did it move on to Bletchley(or is due to move on)?

 

[Envoy]

When I went on a 197 I thought the interior was rather on the warm side. I presumed that it was because the doors at thirds had let all the cold air out at stations.

I really don’t get why they have external sensors to relate the exterior temperature as to what level the internal temperature should be? Surely, it does not work like that and you need an internal thermostat to set the temperature at say 21C? The humans inside a carriage can also give off heat yet external sensors would not know this.

It also makes a difference as to whether or not it is sunny as the sun beams can warm up the interior yet the external sensor would not know this - especially on a cold frosty day with sunshine. If the external sensor is on the sunny side of the train - it surely would warm up more than if it was on the shady side of the train. Perhaps someone can come back and enlighten me on where the external sensor(s) is located?

 

[GWVillager]

I'll leave it to you to tell the passengers. Admittedly there is much more room to stand than on a comparable 158/175 formation but most people would rather not be standing at all.

I’d actually say the opposite is true, oddly. The end vestibule layout of the 158/175 encourages passengers to move into the vehicle and take any empty seats, and only after they’re all gone does significant standing begin. However, the more open layout of the 197s invites people to stand even with plenty of seats empty. This appears to be creating an issue of boarding passengers believing the train is busier than it is and artificially manufacturing overcrowding by staying round the doors, reducing overall capacity.

Thanks for attaching the fleet guide. So a small increase if a 4 car turns up and a much bigger increase when it will be 5 cars.

Even the small increase in seats on a 4 car could be vital in everyone getting a seat on some of those busy services to/from Manchester.

Indeed. Every seat matters on a lot of the Marches trains.

 

[RailWonderer]

The air con is fine. The issue will be the external sensors that measure the ambient tempurature. They're hopeless.

The same problem applies to the 720s which no matter that anyone says, air con ‘fails’ quite often on them, presumably for the sensor reason. There is no way they can be manually activated by the driver or they wouldn’t be off all the time with the units make a big revving up and nothing coming out. It’s not only the 158s and 166s that fail.

I haven’t been on any 197s yet but the two 196s I did a couple of months back were perfectly cool, so maybe sensors were working fine and you were unlucky. The 720s through, I have not had ONE single unit where they worked fine, until we arrived at Liverpool St then they started working. So check when your 197 arrives into Cardiff or Chester and see if it starts working all of a sudden, then it may be the sensors recalibrating.

 

[GWVillager]

I haven’t been on any 197s yet but the two 196s I did a couple of months back were perfectly cool, so maybe sensors were working fine and you were unlucky. The 720s through, I have not had ONE single unit where they worked fine, until we arrived at Liverpool St then they started working. So check when your 197 arrives into Cardiff or Chester and see if it starts working all of a sudden, then it may be the sensors recalibrating.

Interesting. I wonder if it’s direct sunlight that causes them to play up, and they get better in the shade.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Am I right in thinking a 4 carriage 197 (2 x 2 cars) has roughly the same amount of seats as a 3 car 175?

If we're ignoring tip-up seats then a 2-car class 197 has almost the same number of seats as a 2-car class 175 (116 vs 118), so a 2x2-car formation of one type will have a very similar number of seats as the other (236 for 4 coaches of class 175s vs 232 seats with class 197s). This is still a reasonable increase in terms of number of seats over a 3-car class 175 (186 seats).

Aside from the catering cupboard, it shows how inefficient the driving vehicles are though, a (hypothetical 4 car 197/2 unit would have 260 seats, for the same cost as the 232 in a 2+2 lash-up.

The wheelchair-friendly toilet is a big part of that; it's a similar story with 175s.

But will also bring extra standing room.

I'll leave it to you to tell the passengers. Admittedly there is much more room to stand than on a comparable 158/175 formation but most people would rather not be standing at all.

Exactly. The class 197 design emphasises standing room quite a bit more than class 158s or 175s, which is why I don't consider the 'Cavities' to be a fitting replacement on long-distance services. Nobody should have to stand on such services, so give us more legroom, toilets and bays of 4 around tables instead (as the 175s do).

I’d actually say the opposite is true, oddly. The end vestibule layout of the 158/175 encourages passengers to move into the vehicle and take any empty seats, and only after they’re all gone does significant standing begin. However, the more open layout of the 197s invites people to stand even with plenty of seats empty. This appears to be creating an issue of boarding passengers believing the train is busier than it is and artificially manufacturing overcrowding by staying round the doors, reducing overall capacity.

That's doubly interesting as on paper the 197s have a greater total capacity (if standing is included) than either 158s or 175s:

Unit	Seats	Tip-Up	Standing	Total Capacity
class 158 (2-car)	134 (?)	4	59	197 (?)
class 175/0	118	16	58	192
class 175/1	186	20	91	297
class 197/0	116	5	79	200
class 197/1	188	8	118	314

Why can't it just be a reasonable temperature all of the time rather than massively increasing to 28 at the hottest?

While I have no idea if I would consider 28 to be appropriate in any specific set of circumstances, I would argue that having the saloon the same temperature all year round isn't all that sensible. On a hot day, you don't want passengers to have to bring a coat just to stay warm on the train and when it's really cold ideally the train would be heated a bit but not so much that they regret wearing the thermal underwear they'd need to keep warm while at the station waiting for the train.

 

[Dai Corner]

Exactly. The class 197 design emphasises standing room quite a bit more than class 158s or 175s, which is why I don't consider the 'Cavities' to be a fitting replacement on long-distance services. Nobody should have to stand on such services, so give us more legroom, toilets and bays of 4 around tables instead (as the 175s do).

Er, wouldn't more legroom, toilets and tables mean fewer seats and more having to stand. I think standing for up to twenty minutes is considered acceptable anyway?

Having said that, I try to avoid peak times. What's your experience travelling into Cardiff, Manchester and other big cities in the rush hour?

 

[Krokodil]

The wheelchair-friendly toilet is a big part of that; it's a similar story with 175s.

Which is entirely my point, running 2+2 instead of 4 car units unnecessarily duplicates the facilities. You have two catering cupboards, two megabogs, four cabs... Yet with a four car unit you'd have one catering cupboard (though I'd strip that out entirely), one megabog, two cabs, but you'd gain two small bogs.

Having one megabog and two small bogs is more useful for a person with a disability than having just two megabogs, because the extra retention tank means that the toilets won't fill as quickly.

The class 197 design emphasises standing room quite a bit more than class 158s or 175s, which is why I don't consider the 'Cavities' to be a fitting replacement on long-distance services.

They don't do commuting well either. All of that space wasted by the cupboard. Nor can they cope with stopping services on low speed rural branch lines. They were designed to be a Jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none.

so give us more legroom, toilets and bays of 4 around tables instead (as the 175s do).

I miss the Mk3s. Almost all table seating, they had a massive luggage rack at each end of the carriage. I never had to ask people to fold prams down, luggage didn't block aisles or vestibules, and families didn't have trouble finding seats together - they could sit as a family, just like they ought to. Was a great crowdbuster for the commuters too, I reckon that I once got more than 500 passengers on.

Er, wouldn't more legroom, toilets and tables mean fewer seats and more having to stand.

I think that we're working on the basis that two coach trains are inappropriate for almost all work and should not have been ordered in the first place. Capacity issues on long distance services ought to be solved by adding more carriages, not by cramming the passengers even closer together.

I do believe that the executives at TfW do recognise that many procurement decisions made by the KeolisAmey were mistakes. This is why for example the Llandudno-Manchester services that were planned to be three car units are now often diagrammed as four coaches, especially on Saturdays, I gather that James Price saw the situation at Prestatyn for himself and said that it couldn't continue). Unfortunately making wholesale changes to units at this late stage is incredibly difficult and expensive.

I think standing for up to twenty minutes is considered acceptable anyway?

We're not talking 20 minutes. 1hr20mins of standing is common.

 

[Caaardiff]

Which is entirely my point, running 2+2 instead of 4 car units unnecessarily duplicates the facilities. You have two catering cupboards, two megabogs, four cabs... Yet with a four car unit you'd have one catering cupboard (though I'd strip that out entirely), one megabog, two cabs, but you'd gain two small bogs.

Having one megabog and two small bogs is more useful for a person with a disability than having just two megabogs, because the extra retention tank means that the toilets won't fill as quickly.


They don't do commuting well either. All of that space wasted by the cupboard. Nor can they cope with stopping services on low speed rural branch lines. They were designed to be a Jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none.


I miss the Mk3s. Almost all table seating, they had a massive luggage rack at each end of the carriage. I never had to ask people to fold prams down, luggage didn't block aisles or vestibules, and families didn't have trouble finding seats together - they could sit as a family, just like they ought to. Was a great crowdbuster for the commuters too, I reckon that I once got more than 500 passengers on.


I think that we're working on the basis that two coach trains are inappropriate for almost all work and should not have been ordered in the first place. Capacity issues on long distance services ought to be solved by adding more carriages, not by cramming the passengers even closer together.

I do believe that the executives at TfW do recognise that many procurement decisions made by the KeolisAmey were mistakes. This is why for example the Llandudno-Manchester services that were planned to be three car units are now often diagrammed as four coaches, especially on Saturdays, I gather that James Price saw the situation at Prestatyn for himself and said that it couldn't continue). Unfortunately making wholesale changes to units at this late stage is incredibly difficult and expensive.


We're not talking 20 minutes. 1hr20mins of standing is common.

But TFW isn't just running Cardiff - Manchester. They're running Milford Haven - Manchester / Holyhead - Manchester & Cardiff / Birmingham - Holyhead, Aberystwyth and Pwllheli as well as many other routes. The big city routes require capacity, but the further they get into Wales, the capacity isn't required, hence the portion working. Having 2 and 3 car units that can detach as they get towards quieter locations works perfectly for TFW.

I wouldn't say they've necessarily got it quite right, as the likes of Aberystwyth/Pwllheli, sometimes Holyhead/North West Wales and West Wales can sometimes do with 3 cars rather than 2 cars.

The cupboards are a pointless exercise, but as with most things with TFW, they'll never admit it was the wrong decision.

2 carriages are perfect for many TFW routes. HOWL, Crewe - Shrewsbury, Ebbw Vale - Newport, Fishguard Harbour, Milford Haven, Pembroke Dock (Out of peak summer), Conwy Valley to name a few.

I could really see an order for a few more 197's coming soon. Eventually the 153's will need to be replaced, and depending on how the 230's go in the coming weeks will likely decide whether they will stay long term. Throw in the expected new routes Cardiff - Liverpool, Bangor - Liverpool, Ebbw Vale - Newport, extra Aberystwyth services and potential capacity boosts to Pwllheli services. Several 3 cars would make sense to free up 2 cars on other routes or capacity boosts. Also, although a long way off, is the potential of Swansea metro/District line services.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

2 carriages are perfect for many TFW routes. Milford Haven

Only if you ran it as a Carmarthen Milford Haven shuttle… regularly very busy as far as Carmarthen.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Exactly. The class 197 design emphasises standing room quite a bit more than class 158s or 175s, which is why I don't consider the 'Cavities' to be a fitting replacement on long-distance services. Nobody should have to stand on such services, so give us more legroom, toilets and bays of 4 around tables instead (as the 175s do).

Er, wouldn't more legroom, toilets and tables mean fewer seats and more having to stand.

Not necessarily. If the space for the extra legroom, toilets and tables is taken from standing space (ie. by making the doors narrower) and not from seats. A 2-car class 175 has:

• 2cm greater seat pitch than a class 197
• more bays (and therefore potentially more tables) than a class 197
• a second toilet
• 2 more seats than a 197

A class 175 has less room to stand = more room for the good stuff.

They don't do commuting well either. All of that space wasted by the cupboard.

They could do an interior refit though and remove the cupboard, making it suitable for commuting. They cannot do the same for the space wasted by the wide doors.

Nor can they cope with stopping services on low speed rural branch lines.

Why can't they do stopping services on low-speed routes?

I think that we're working on the basis that two coach trains are inappropriate for almost all work and should not have been ordered in the first place.

Trouble is, there are parts of the network where 2-car is probably plenty (eg. the Cambrian Coast, at least for 90% of the day) for six months of the year. (I won't go further because it'd be getting speculative). I agree that these units should not have been ordered in the first place, but for different reasons.

Only if you ran it as a Carmarthen Milford Haven shuttle… regularly very busy as far as Carmarthen.

Some days you could probably cut that back to just a Milford Haven - Haverfordwest shuttle; such are the numbers I saw getting on at Haverfordwest once or twice before COVID (not sure how the numbers are now though, and it's accedemic as TfW have shown no sign of plans to run anything other than a 2-car class 197 on the vast majority of services west of Swansea).

 

[Krokodil]

but the further they get into Wales, the capacity isn't required

There are a plenty of trains that are busier west of Chester than east of.

Having 2 and 3 car units that can detach as they get towards quieter locations works perfectly for TFW.

No it doesn't. Coupling and uncoupling is a performance risk. 197s aren't fond of uncoupling on straight track, they absolutely hate uncoupling on curved track. It's appropriate for places like Machynlleth but elsewhere it's impractical. How often do you see Northern portion-working its 195s? Do West Mids run pairs of 2-car 196s around or do they use a 4-car?

I wouldn't say they've necessarily got it quite right, as the likes of Aberystwyth/Pwllheli, sometimes Holyhead/North West Wales and West Wales can sometimes do with 3 cars rather than 2 cars.

Sometimes? How much experience do you have of trains out of Holyhead? 2 coaches can be full and standing from Bangor, let alone by the time it gets to Colwyn Bay or Rhyl. 2-car Llandudno services can be full and standing all the way into town, long after the bucket and spade lot have decamped at Rhyl, that's why TfW has started running them as 4-car sets. The Cambrian meanwhile should ideally be 3+3, not 2+2, we hear some horror stories of Barmouth in the summer.

The cupboards are a pointless exercise, but as with most things with TFW, they'll never admit it was the wrong decision.

Actually management have acknowledged that they're unwanted, but removing them retrospectively is easier said than done. The person who originally specified them is long-gone of course.

2 carriages are perfect for many TFW routes. HOWL, Crewe - Shrewsbury, Ebbw Vale - Newport, Fishguard Harbour, Milford Haven, Pembroke Dock (Out of peak summer), Conwy Valley to name a few.

Calling that list "many" is a stretch. "Some" would be more accurate. The services you list represent a tiny fraction of TfW's mainline operations. Certainly not enough to justify the 51/26 split of two car units to three. The other way round would have been better. Quite a few of those routes listed will remain the preserve of 153s, while Ebbw Vale - Newport is supposed to be 231s.

2J07 now runs as a four car 158 to Pwllheli, something that was a no-no in the past. Presumably a solution has now been found to the issue of long trains overhanging automatic crossings at some halts.

Why can't they do stopping services on low-speed routes?

I'm not a driver, but I believe that they're quite light-footed. They have been ruled out from working the stopping services on the Bidstons (if the semi-fast goes ahead they'll do that), while on the Conwy Valley they can't maintain the same timings as the 150s used to (even they used to lose a couple of minutes, but not this many). They're also quite reluctant to initially take power. Slippy season will prove interesting.

With higher linespeeds, gentler gradients and a clean rail they can clip minutes off of 175 timings on the mainline though.